Skip to content
aiqbench takeAI Products

aiqbench analysis

Despite recent strides in code generation, current frontier LLM agents struggle to reliably automate complex Office tasks, achieving only 68.8% of the performance benchmark set by human professionals. The study reveals that even advanced agentic systems with iterative repair mechanisms fall significantly short of the 95.5% score required for practical proficiency in long-horizon planning and multi-application integration. This gap highlights that fine-grained document automation remains a critical unsolved challenge for deploying LLMs in professional productivity environments.
Source coveringarXiv
What this isA model's reading of the article and related coverage, written for aiqbench. Not the publisher's words.

Mind the Gap: Can Frontier LLMs Pass a Standardized Office Proficiency Exam?

arXiv2 min read

arXiv:2606.10956v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The deployment of Large Language Model (LLM) agents for computer automation is accelerating, yet their ability to navigate complex, professional-grade productivity software is largely untested. We argue that Office automation is an ideal environment for benchmarking document-automation capability, as it requires long-horizon planning and reasoning, precise parameter configuration, and multi-application integration. To quantify this capability, we introduce an evaluation based on China's National Computer Rank Examination (NCRE), featuring 200 comprehensive practical-operation tasks across Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. Each task is scored on a 100-point rubric scale using 7,118 machine-gradable criteria, and Score Rate (SR) denotes the mean percentage of rubric points earned across these tasks. We benchmark 7 frontier LLMs and observe stark limitations: single-turn models score a maximum of 36.6%. A stronger agentic system with execution feedback, iterative repair, and broader Office automation access reaches 68.8%, but remains below the 95.5% community-reference score used as a scoring sanity check. Ultimately, our experiments demonstrate that despite recent advancements in code generation, achieving reliable fine-grained Office document automation remains a significant challenge for current code-generating LLM and agent systems.

Abstract:The deployment of Large Language Model (LLM) agents for computer automation is accelerating, yet their ability to navigate complex, professional-grade productivity software is largely untested. We argue that Office automation is an ideal environment for benchmarking document-automation capability, as it requires long-horizon planning and reasoning, precise parameter configuration, and multi-application integration. To quantify this capability, we introduce an evaluation based on China's National Computer Rank Examination (NCRE), featuring 200 comprehensive practical-operation tasks across Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. Each task is scored on a 100-point rubric scale using 7,118 machine-gradable criteria, and Score Rate (SR) denotes the mean percentage of rubric points earned across these tasks. We benchmark 7 frontier LLMs and observe stark limitations: single-turn models score a maximum of 36.6%. A stronger agentic system with execution feedback, iterative repair, and broader Office automation access reaches 68.8%, but remains below the 95.5% community-reference score used as a scoring sanity check. Ultimately, our experiments demonstrate that despite recent advancements in code generation, achieving reliable fine-grained Office document automation remains a significant challenge for current code-generating LLM and agent systems.

Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computation and Language (cs.CL)

arXiv:2606.10956 [cs.AI]

(or arXiv:2606.10956v1 [cs.AI] for this version)

https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2606.10956 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Full text under the publisher's open licence · 200 words

Related coverage